MMIS 627 Deliverable-B

MMIS 627
Deliverable-B

Scott Leith
December 2, 2007

TOPIC # 7: Review at least five vendors that focus on server virtualization or any level of virtualization. Discuss the types of products and services these vendors have and indicate the customers that use these services.

TITLE: Virtualization delivers more value from the information resources companies already use.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Statement of the problem... 3
Body of the Paper.. 3
Advantages of virtualization... 3
Who benefits from virtual servers. 4
Types of virtualization and their application. 6
Conclusion. 7
Reference List.. 8
Bibliography.. 8

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

The labor of delivering more value to the organization out of its information resources without increasing costs seems to be a paradox. Value is tied to productivity, or the product of the work and resources expended. Information technology departments need to fully utilize the resources they already have in order to create value without using additional work and resources (Burry, 2003). They also need to get the most value out of the time already being invested. In today’s competitive market, companies cannot afford to waste their information or human resources and so they must employ the tools that let them maximize their potential. Companies must achieve gains in software development, desktop deployment and maintenance, hardware costs, server management, security, and efficiency of business continuity planning (McAllister, 2007).

BODY OF THE PAPER

ADVANTAGES OF VIRTUALIZATION

Virtualization can create gains in productivity throughout the Information Technology environment. First and perhaps most obviously, virtual servers such as VM Ware or Solaris Containers reduce hardware costs because multiple servers can be hosted on a single chassis (McAllister, 2007). Organizations can get more out of their hardware investment. Most servers are not fully utilizing the hardware resources, particularly the processors. Companies should more completely utilize the computing resources in the hardware that they already pay for. Businesses implementing load balancing or redundancy can do so without investments in new hardware (Burry, 2003).

Benefits include improvements in utility as well. Virtual servers can be installed almost as quickly as a computer can be started up. System Administrators can migrate a new server to a production environment, create new instances of a server for load balancing, and recover from failures much faster than if they had to rebuild or reconfigure a device. The virtual servers become device independent, some even platform independent. Any servers running the virtual host operating system can have new servers deployed quickly to them (Burry & Nelson, 2004).

Further productivity gains can be achieved in business processes by putting virtualization to work. Testing of new configurations, applications, or code can be done safely and with repeatability in a virtual environment. A developer can quickly recreate a heterogeneous environment on a single laptop.

WHO BENEFITS FROM VIRTUAL SERVERS

Virtual server applications are not exclusive to large enterprises. These days anyone can find an aspect of virtualization that works for them. While grid computing remains a technology found only in large organizations, small businesses can benefit from reduced hardware costs as much or more than their larger counterparts. Developers in any corporation reap rewards in security and convenience (Burry & Nelson, 2004). Even home users benefit when they surf the Internet with impunity from the security of a virtual desktop environment.

The Small Business case for virtualization is simple. Reduced hardware costs come from hosting several or nearly all services on a single or pair of servers. Disaster recovery goals are met because all the company needs to do is acquire a new piece of hardware and start the virtual machines again (Burry & Nelson, 2004). Managing the services is easy because they are all on one device with the same or similar environments and configurations (Burry, 2003). Often times fewer licenses are needed. This is true of Solaris Zones which focus on dedicating resources to multiple services instead of running multiple instances of an operating system. Furthermore, with the trend of small business toward using Linux, open source virtualization software such as Xen is maturing. This makes virtualization feasible even in open source environments (Cummings, 2006a).

For large organizations, the major draw is the efficiency of virtualization. Server performance can be improved through creating multiple instances of a service and using load balancing. A single service can hang from poor coding or resource intensive queries but the one service cannot hog the server’s resources because it is only allowed a predefined portion of the resources. Also virtual machines install very quickly and are easily replicated so companies can move services quickly from development to production. Virtualization is more efficient in the datacenter as well. Resources such as space and energy consumption are more efficiently used by virtual servers as is server management efforts. Grid computing uses a network of servers and distributes the load among them from a central point. In this part hardware abstraction, part virtualization, and allows companies to maximize the use of their hardware resources (Cummings, 2006b).

Gains on the development side include more than the speedy transfer of virtual machines from development to production. Developers can create and test their products on virtual machines isolated from the organization’s production environment. Developers can quickly create or import systems into this virtual machine’s environment by running them on the same computer or on the same small network. This way the development system can be tested with all the production systems without being on the production network – all in a very short amount of time (Burry & Nelson, 2004).

Another group who benefits from virtualization is private users at home. Virtualization allows for absolute security on a user’s PC. Users can work with in their virtual environment without worrying about how it will affect their files or purchased software. Users can surf the Web from a virtual machine without fear because the virtual machine can completely isolated and any changes from malicious code or malware need not be saved. This is a common tactic of information security professionals who are wary of the Internet.

TYPES OF VIRTUALIZATION AND THEIR APPLICATION

Virtualization products can be divided into four categories: full virtualization, para-virtualization, OS-level virtualization, and hardware virtualization. Full virtualization involves running multiple complete instances of an operating system on a single device. Software called a hypervisor coordinates access to the hardware resources by the operating systems. Practically any operating system can be run on this type of virtualization and they need not be the same OS. Examples of this type of virtualization are VMware, Microsoft Virtual PC, and KVM (kernel-based virtual machine) for Linux. A drawback to this type of virtualization is that the hypervisor must use the processor too and so the processor is not completely devoted to production (McAllister, 2007).

Para-virtualization is more limiting than full virtualization but it is also more efficient. In para-virtualization each OS is aware that it is running as a virtual machine. This is restrictive in that it requires the OS support virtualization by the hosting hypervisor. However, the guest OSes cooperate with the hypervisor and host OS to allow the hypervisor to run more efficiently and reduce the strain on the processor (McAllister, 2007). Xen is an example of this type of virtualization. It is specific to Linux however because it requires modifications to the kernel of the guest OS and this is not possible on proprietary operating systems (Cummings, 2006a).

OS-level virtualization does not employ a hypervisor. Hardware resources are allocated to the virtual servers by the operating system. The operating system maintains the virtual servers as independent from one another but they are not independent of the host OS. As such, all virtual servers run the same operating system. Though less flexible, this incarnation of server virtualization is faster and easier to manage. Examples of OS-level virtualization are Sun Containers and Virtuozzo/OpenVZ for Linux (McAllister, 2007).

The latest trend in virtualization is hardware virtualization. Intel and AMD have included in their latest x86 chipsets support for virtualization in their hardware. The chipsets manage “virtual server access to I/O channels and hardware resources” alleviating the most processor-intensive tasks of the hypervisor. This technology also allows servers to employ para-virtualization without modifying the operating system. One barrier for this type of virtualization is that software must be written specifically to support the hardware virtualization. This makes newer software necessary (McAllister, 2007).

CONCLUSION

Virtualization is becoming the solution of choice for a multitude of challenges. Support for virtualization will soon be found in all new products as companies continue to find new uses for it. This should be on every network or system architect’s mind because the benefits are compelling and they are not exclusive to a single environment. Quite the opposite, with all the different types and applications of virtualization, it can be employed by everyone. Even home users can benefit from virtual environments. It reduces hardware and energy costs, eases system management, increases efficiency, and maximizes the contribution of computing resources.

REFERENCE LIST

Burry, C. M., & Nelson, C. (2004, January 21). Plan on server virtualization. Computerworld. Retrieved October 20, 2007, from http://www.computerworld.com/softwaretopics/os/story/0,10801,89232,00.html.

Burry, C. (2003, June 18). Server consolidation: Steps to IT and business rationalization. Computerworld. Article 82228. Retrieved October 20, 2007, from http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=82228&intsrc=article_pots_side.

Cummings, J. (2006a, November 11). Linux virtualization heats up. Networkworld. Retrieved November 30, 2007, from http://www.networkworld.com/buzz/2006/111306-virtualization-side1.html.

Cummings, J. (2006b, November 11). Virtualization hits the big time. Networkworld. Retrieved November 30, 2007, from http://www.networkworld.com/buzz/2006/111306-virtualization.html.

McAllister, N. (2007). Server virtualization. Infoworld. Retrieved October 20, 2007, from http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/02/12/07FEvirtualserv_1.html.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Rich, A. (2004, September 4). Spotlight on Solaris Zones feature. Sun Microsystems. Retrieved November 25, 2007, from http://www.sun.com/bigadmin/features/articles/solaris_zones.jsp.

MMIS 0627 Deliverable-A

MMIS 627
Deliverable-A

Scott Leith
October 21, 2007

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Deliverable-a.. 3
Topic of the research and development paper. 3
Title of the research and development paper. 3
Statement of the problem.. 3
Outline. 3
reference list. 3

TOPIC # 7: Review at least five vendors that focus on server virtualization or any level of virtualization. Discuss the types of products and services these vendors have and indicate the customers that use these services.

TITLE: Virtualization delivers more value from the information resources companies already use.

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

The labor of delivering more value to the organization out of its information resources without increasing costs seems to be a paradox. Value is tied to productivity, or the product of the work and resources expended. Information technology departments need to fully utilize the resources they already have in order to create value without using additional work and resources (Burry, 2003). They also need to get the most value out of the time already being invested. In today’s competitive market, companies cannot afford to waste their information or human resources and so they must employ the tools that let them maximize their potential. Companies must achieve gains in software development, desktop deployment and maintenance, hardware costs, server management, security, and efficiency of business continuity planning (McAllister, 2007).

OUTLINE

1. Introduction and problem statement
2. Advantages of virtualization
3. Who Benefits from virtual servers
a. Small companies
b. Large organizations
c. Developers
d. Service desks
4. Types of virtualization and their application
a. Full virtualization
b. Para-virtualization
c. OS-level virtualization
d. Hardware virtualization
5. Conclusion

REFERENCE LIST

Burry, C. (2003, June 18). Server consolidation: Steps to IT and business rationalization. Computerworld. Article 82228. Retrieved October 20, 2007, from http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=82228&intsrc=article_pots_side. http://www.computerworld.com/action/ article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=82228. McAllister, N. (2007). Server virtualization. Infoworld. Retrieved October 20, 2007, from http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/02/12/07FEvirtualserv_1.html. http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/02/12/07FEvirtualserv_1.html

MMIS 0620 Deliverable-B

MMIS 620 Deliverable-B

Scott Leith
December 2, 2007

TOPIC # 3: The different role and scope of the job of the CTO vs the CIO in information systems in an organization.

TITLE: The role of the CTO can benefit an organization, even when the title cannot.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Statement of the problem................................................................... 3
Body of the paper................................................................................. 3
Defining the CTO.................................................................................. 3
Focus on the role, not the title............................................................ 5
Difference between the CIO and CTO............................................... 6
When companies need a champion of technology and innovation. 7
When companies don’t need a CTO................................................... 8
Conclusion.............................................................................................. 8
Reference lIST..................................................................................... 10

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

It has been argued that the establishment of a Chief Technology Officer (CTO) is damaging to an organization. The belief is that the Chief Technology Office creates strife because of its title, stifles ingenuity because of its role as lead innovator, interrupts the chain of command by inserting itself between the Chief Information Officer (CIO) and his/her subordinates, and is unaccountable for its realm of responsibility (Meyer, 2007). At the same time, organizations are facing an increasingly overwhelming number of decisions to make regarding their information resources. A company must have somewhere to turn for advice about their technology because these choices will affect their bottom line (Tweney, 2002).

BODY OF THE PAPER

DEFINING THE CTO

Microsoft’s former CTO, Nathan Myhrvold was asked once, “What is a CTO?” His response: “Hell if I know.” Once, Bill Gates postured with him what were some examples of great CTOs. Myrhvold said, “After about five minutes we decided that, well, there must be some, but we didn't have on the tip of our tongues exactly who was a great CTO, because many of the people who actually were great CTO's didn't have that title, and at least some of the people who have that title arguably aren't great at it.” (Brockman). The role of a Chief Technology Officer and even the title associated with that role varies from one organization another based on their needs and their organizational structure. The constant is that the role typically falls into one or more of the following categories: genius, administrator, director, executive, and advocate (Smith, 2007).

The genius category allots the CTO the responsibility for researching emerging technologies, planning the future technology efforts of the company, and coordinating with the company’s engineers for the development and integration of the new technologies (Meyer, 2007). This role is most suitable for small businesses which have a lot of new technology to coordinate in a small amount of time, and in organizations where their technology is core to their success. The genius character is typically skilled at innovating, has vision and confidence and capitalizes on technology opportunities. These individuals often make large contributions to the company’s product offerings or competitiveness through technology innovation. Successful figures filling the genius role include Google founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page (Smith, 2007).

The administrator CTO is the caretaker of Information Technology requisitions. The key responsibilities are ensuring products and services that the organization uses live up to expectations and vendor claims. This CTO negotiates contracts, reviews product performance, and compares technical specifications by calling upon an expertise that other executives and purchasing departments simply do not have. This role is common in government organizations (Smith, 2007).

Companies with large research and development efforts often establish a director type of CTO. This individual is usually in charge of the research and development department and has a C level position in order to better align the R & D efforts with the company’s strategic objectives. A director CTO would be responsible for ensuring this division benefits the company’s market position while maintaining an R & D environment conducive to successful development efforts (Smith, 2007).

An executive CTO can be similar to the director role but focuses on managing the business rather than the department. This individual does not create the innovation but manages the innovation process. An executive CTO contributes to the strategic goals of the company and examples abound in organizations such as Intel, GE, IBM, and Lockheed Martin (Smith, 2007).

The advocate CTO advances the company by focusing on how the customer interacts with the organization. By delivering a customer experience above and beyond that of their competitors through harnessing emerging technologies, Rob Carter, the CTO of FedEx, set himself at the top of the field and earned much recognition in the Information Technology community. This individual does not create the technology but acquires it and employs it to capitalize on an opportunity that changes the company’s place in the market. While this role is often performed by CIOs, CIOs in general are focused on internal processes while the CTO focuses externally on the customer’s perspective (Smith, 2007).

FOCUS ON THE ROLE, NOT THE TITLE

When discussing the Chief Technology Officer position, it is necessary to focus on the role not the title. The title does not specifically define the role, nor does the role require the specific title of CTO. A wide variety of titles have referred to these roles. The title must be based on the organization’s structure. What is important is that the position is placed in the organization so that it has the appropriate amount of responsibility and so that its impact is not limited by the hierarchy.

A decision every company must face is whether to establish this position as a C level position. The Chief Information Officer has traditionally been IT’s champion at the executive table. Some companies will keep it this way with the CTO answering to the CIO. Others will have the CIO answerable to the CTO depending on the strength of the company. Considerations should include whether there will be one individual filling the role for the entire organization or whether there will be one per division. Also the type of industry should be considered. A technology retailer places more emphasis on technology contributions that a stable and steady construction company. Oracle has a Chief Gaming Officer and so would not scoff at a Chief Technology Officer title (had they not already had one) and many companies are establishing other C level information technology related positions such as Chief Information Security Officer.

Placing the position correctly in the organizational structure is a topic of hot debate. The position’s responsibilities should not overlap with others. System Administrators who innovate in their own area of responsibility and specialization should not be discouraged to innovate because a CTO has been hired. Chief Technology Officers should not be tasked with issuing processes and mandates to others who understand those tasks better than the CTO to begin with (Meyer, 2007). Again the correct title and place within a hierarchy is different for different companies and in different industries but the position must be created where it is given the best opportunity to contribute.

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE CIO AND CTO

The differences between the Chief Information Officer and the Chief Technology Officer represent a division of responsibilities and they complement each other to achieve the balance so often fought for in today’s Information Technology departments. Foremost is the balance between business and technology. CIOs are more likely to have a business background as compared to the technical background common for CTOs. The positioning of CIOs above CTOs reflects the emphasis on business driving technology. CIOs have operational and managerial strengths while CTOs have technologist strengths. Both CIOs and CTOs must be strategists but it is perhaps slightly more important for CTOs. CIOs focus internally on business processes and controlling projects and expenditures. This is often referred to as a bottom line focus compared to the top line interested CTOs. CTOs look for new opportunity to create revenue and offer new services. They often act as a customer advocate focusing on the perspectives of those outside the organization (Smith, 2003). These differences compliment each other and make for a more complete fulfillment of management needs.

WHEN COMPANIES NEED A CHAMPION OF TECHNOLOGY AND INNOVATION

A Chief Technology Officer with a seat at the executive table should be a champion of technology and innovation. This is needed when the organization relies on the strategic use of technology to achieve future goals. A company also needs such a champion when they can benefit from someone who advocates for how technology can help external customers. Often, this does not just benefit the company; it keeps them at the top of the market and ahead of their competition (Smith, 2003).

Shortfalls come with only having a CIO. The CIO often has no time to research new technologies. While a CIO focuses on building up a business skill set, the technology skill set ages and companies must make technology decisions based on current industry knowledge (Smith, 2003). In other companies technical innovation or proposals of new systems is left up to one team. This means systems may not meet the needs of everyone in the organization or it may conflict with other systems. Also, existing systems may not be fully utilized across the organization. Internal teams may not focus on external opportunities. Individuals on these teams are experts in their own specialty, not broad technologies or technologies outside of the scope of their tasks. This team may also lack the perspective to coordinate integration projects objectively (Meyer, 2007). A CTO as the champion of this process helps alleviate these concerns.

WHEN COMPANIES DON’T NEED A CTO

Not every organization needs a Chief Technology Officer. Some have their roles addressed by a number of different individuals in such a way that they already achieve the same goals as bringing on a CTO would address (Meyer, 2007). Some companies are not technology centric or introduce little new technologies. In organizations which do not need to pursue new technologies fulltime, a CTO is a luxury (Tweney, 2004). Hiring a CTO in a basket weavers’ conglomerate would probably be a bad decision. Alternatives include contracting out for CTO responsibilities on a temporary basis. Essentially, if a CTO would not meet the needs of the organization, they should not hire one.

CONCLUSION

Chief Technology Officers are champions of technology and innovation. They can be the genius, administrator, director, executive or advocate. The title they hold is not important, what is important is that responsibilities of the CTO are addressed in each organization because technology and innovation are essential in today’s marketplace. Piling the CTOs responsibilities on the CIO is acceptable only in organizations with little new technology, because the roles of the CTO and CIO are different and are too much for one person in any large or fast paced environment. It is equally important that each organization carefully place the CTO position within their hierarchy so that this position has responsibility for its tasks and the ability to execute them. When organizations do this successfully, they become more competitive and more successful in their industry.

REFERENCE LIST

Brockman, J. (n.d.). Nathan Myhrvold: The chef. Digerati web site. Retrieved October 11, 2007, from http://www.edge.org/digerati/myhrvold/myhrvold_p2.html.

Meyer, N. D. (2007, June 30). CTO: A dangerous title. CIO Magazine. Article 121904. Retrieved October 11, 2007, from http://www.cio.com/article/121904/.

Smith, R. (2007, July 1). 5 Patterns of the Chief Technology Officer [Electronic version]. Research-Technology Management, 50 (4). Retrieved November 30, 2007, from http://www.ctonet.org/documents/5PatternsofCTO.pdf.

Smith, R. (2003, July 1). The Chief Technology Officer: Strategic responsibilities and relationships. [Electronic version]. Research-Technology Management, 46 (4). Retrieved November 30, 2007, from http://www.ctonet.org/resources/SmithR_CTOStrategy.pdf.

Tweney, D. F. (2002, April 11). Does your company need a CTO? [Electronic version]. Business 2.0. Retrieved November 30, 2007, from http://dylan.tweney.com/writing.php?display=301.

MMIS 0620 Deliverable-A

MMIS 620
Deliverable-A

Scott Leith
October 21, 2007

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Deliverable-a.. 3
Topic of the research and development paper. 3
Title of the research and development paper. 3
Statement of the problem.. 3
Outline. 3
reference list. 3

TOPIC # 3: The different role and scope of the job of the CTO vs the CIO in information systems in an organization.

TITLE: The role of the CTO can benefit an organization, even when the title cannot.

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

It has been argued that the establishment of a Chief Technology Officer is damaging to an organization. The belief is that the Chief Technology Office creates strife because of its title, stifles ingenuity because of its role as lead innovator, interrupts the chain of command by inserting itself between the Chief Information Officer and his/her subordinates, and is unaccountable for its realm of responsibility (Meyer, 2007). At the same time, organizations are facing an increasingly overwhelming number of decisions to make regarding their information resources. A company must have somewhere to turn for advice about their technology because these choices will affect their bottom line (Tweney, 2002).

OUTLINE

1. Introduction and Problem Statement
2. Defining the CTO
a. Five types of CTOs – Genius, Administrator, Director, Executive, Advocate
b. It’s about the position, not the title
i. Should it be a C-level position?
(1). Depends on the Industry
(2). Depends on the effect the IT department has on the company
(3). IT champion at the C-level – Already have a CIO
ii. Determining factors
(1). Organizational structure and organizational culture must be sustained
(2). Responsibility of the CTO
c. Difference between the CIO and CTO
3. When companies need a champion of technology and innovation
a. Strategic use of technology for future goals
b. Advocate for how technology can help external customers
c. Shortfalls of only having a CIO
d. Coordinate integration projects objectively
4. When companies don’t need a CTO
a. Doesn’t meet needs of the company
5. Conclusion

REFERENCE LIST

Meyer, N. D. (2007, June 30). CTO: A dangerous title. CIO Magazine. Article 121904. Retrieved October 11, 2007, from http://www.cio.com/article/121904/. http://www.cio.com/article/121904/.
Tweney, D. F. (2002, April 11). Does your company need a CTO? [Electronic version]. Business 2.0.

Introduction

Hey, I am Scott Leith. I am 23 years old and live in Palm Beach Gardens, FL with my wife, Shannon, and 4 cats. I am currently employed as an Information Security Analyst with the Department of Transportation in Boca Raton, FL. Shannon is a Social Worker and works closely with children 13-16 years old who are going to age-out in the foster care system. We just bought and moved into our first house in the beginning of November. Originally, I am from Maryland and have only been a resident of Florida since March. I am really getting used to the lack of cold and love it thus far. I am pursuing my Masters of Science in Management Information Systems with a Speciality in Information Security.